Public service chief offers essential advice

New guidelines are a timely reminder of the dangers of a highly politicised bureaucracy.

Sir Humphrey Appleby would have been bemused. The federal public service has made news by declaring its independence from the Government. Much has changed in the 23 years since the TV series Yes, Minister adopted the title as ironic comment on one of its central premises, that governments come and go but the public service will always be there to keep the country on a safe course. In Australia, where public service mandarins also once imperiously advised ministers and even overturned decisions, governments of all political hues have in recent decades recast the relationship to the point where the Sir Humphreys of public services past must be spinning in their graves. The politicisation of the public service has been so comprehensive, at federal and state level, that the trend amounts to a largely unremarked corruption of our Westminster system of government. The trend was already established when the Hawke government abolished the Public Service Board in 1987 and accelerated after the Howard Government's election in 1996 - a mass sacking of department heads ensued. In 1997, then public service chief Max Moore-Wilton told a parliamentary committee the reality was that heads of agencies were regarded as servants of the Government.

As tenure has been replaced by contracts, frank and fearless advice has given way to a self-preserving instinct for telling ministers what they want to hear. A crucial check on bad government has been weakened, as has the public service's role in ensuring ministers are held to account when things go wrong. This came to a head in the "children overboard" affair and, more recently, in doubts about Government intelligence on Iraq. In the case of "children overboard", public servants at the highest levels, who were made aware of the truth, ignored their duty to ensure their ministers received this information and thus did not perpetuate a politically convenient falsehood through an election campaign. In a report a year ago, Public Service Commissioner Andrew Podger said the affair was a timely reminder of the public service's duty to be apolitical, accountable for its actions and frank, accurate, comprehensive and timely with its advice. It was also clear that ministers relied on advisers to assert authority over public servants, which enabled ministers to disown their staff (who are not publicly accountable) and their actions when it suited. When Mr Podger this week announced new guidelines, APS Values and Code of Practice, he referred to the "children overboard" affair in acknowledging concerns about politicisation. He also reminded public servants that they must not be bullied by ministerial staff. Sir Humphrey, of course, would never have let this happen. Yet all is not lost, nor should it be. The public service, unlike a succession of governments, has now taken responsibility for reflecting on and protecting its role. Should this help restore a proper relationship between politicians and public servants, so the latter serve the public rather than a political interest, it will have done Australian government a great service.